The International Cricket Council has become the latest sports body to ban transgender players from the elite women’s game if they have gone through male puberty.

The ICC said it had taken the decision, following an extensive scientific review and nine-month consultation, to “protect the integrity of the international women’s game and the safety of players”.

It joins rugby union, swimming, cycling, athletics and rugby league, who have all gone down a similar path in recent years after citing concerns over fairness or safety.

  • sealhaslupus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’m going to go out on a limb and say that not many users on Lemmy follow Cricket or understand it fully. My comment isn’t going to cover if the decision by the ICC is correct (or otherwise) but to provide a little insight into the men and women’s games

    Speed / pace is a noticeable difference between the sexes. I don’t believe there are any current female players that consistently bowl pace over 120km/h. In contrast, male pace bowlers generally try to meet a consistent speed of 135km/h for the same role. The upper bounds for men is roughly 160km/h and maybe only one or two pro players globally can do this.

    There are enough men’s bowlers who can bowl at 150km/h. At this speed an average batter would find it difficult to see the ball. Arguably batters in baseball receive faster pitches but at 150km/h+ including the ball bouncing makes it incredibly difficult to face.

    The batting is also different but it might be harder to explain to a non-cricketing audience why this is.

    • BillyTheSkidMark@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      To add extra weight to this comment. It is a common tactic to attempt to “bounce” a batter out, which basically means bowling with enough speed at such a short length that it comes towards the body, and especially, the head. If a batter is unprepared, it usually requires getting out of the way because trying to play a shot is likely to end up with you getting out or struck by the ball.

      The ball is much harder and denser than a baseball and even a famous up and coming professional, international, batter died when he failed to get out of the way and was struck in the head.

      Basically, there is a very real safety concern for players when it comes to something like this.

    • ShaunaTheDead@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      This isn’t about male bowlers though. The physiology of transgender people changes very quickly after starting Hormone Replacement Therapy. Do you have data on transgender women and bowling in cricket? Because data relating to male bowlers is not applicable.

    • Jojo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      As someone who is not an athlete and not really interested in sports as a spectator either, I’ve used arguments like that before in good faith. Why is it a problem? Most people never get the chance to compete at a high level in any kind of athletics, full stop. Participants at the highest level are all, necessarily, exceptional individuals.

      Can you help me understand what makes that particular exception to be so important? Why would women who have undergone one puberty or the other cast aspersions? Like you said, there are methods like testing hormone levels to ensure a level playing field. Given that, it seems like the only aspersions to be cast would be that their history somehow makes them less of a woman, which I can’t agree with.

      • steeznson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        I can’t speak for everyone but ime when people use the argument they are often more interested equality or inclusion at all costs. Their good intentions blind them to the fact that womens’ sport has spent centuries trying go gain validity / parity with mens’ sport.

        • Jojo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          But isn’t the whole reason for women’s sports trying to gain validity about inclusion? Doesn’t parity mean, in another word, equality?

          I’m not really sure I understand the difference, is all I’m saying. And again, speaking as someone who mainly thinks about sports by wishing they made my life less of a hassle when there’s a road closure for some game I don’t care about.

        • steeznson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Just responding to myself here. My original comment which sparked off this discussion/chain appears to have been deleted. I thought I had been respectful but in the future I’d recommend mods just remove news stories that make them uncomfortable instead of censoring comments.

      • Gabu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Participants at the highest level are all, necessarily, exceptional individuals.

        Bullshit. High level athletes, artists, chefs, etc. aren’t exceptional by god-given talent, but by relentless pursuit of that skill. Some of the best football (soccer) players of all time had unwanted physical builds or even small “defects”. Some of the best volleyball players were way shorter than their peers. The problem with having trans women competing on the same field as cis women in most sports is that the biological advantage they might get far surpasses the most rigorous training they could do, i.e. it becomes about genetic makeup.

        • Jojo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          The problem with having trans women competing on the same field as cis women in most sports is that the biological advantage they might get far surpasses the most rigorous training they could do, i.e. it becomes about genetic makeup.

          The implication of this is that a trans woman who hasn’t devoted her life to the sport will be able to compete at the highest levels. I think that is patently wrong. Most trans women, like most other women, would never have a chance at that without having devoted their lives.

          On top of that, many women (and likely trans women though I can’t say for sure) do devote their lives to a sport but still never make it to the highest levels of competition. It’s obviously not just about “god-given talent” as you said, but exceptional circumstances are a necessary condition. Not necessarily in the same way and the same set of conditions for every athlete, but every top-level performer is, necessarily, exceptional.

          • Gabu@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            The implication of this is that a trans woman who hasn’t devoted her life to the sport will be able to compete at the highest levels

            There’s no such implication. They’d still have to train, but there’d be an inherent advantage. A common example used to justify the division of sports between male and female categories is grip strength – the female world record is ~65kg, whereas the male average is ~50kg. A trans woman who underwent male puberty would have an unfair advantage, on average.

            • Jojo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              A common example used to justify the division of sports between male and female categories is grip strength – the female world record is ~65kg, whereas the male average is ~50kg.

              I’ve seen this statistic before in this context. What I hadn’t seen (despite trying to find it) is any data on trans women’s grip strength, or how well grip strength correlates to athletic ability. I don’t disagree that trans women have had different life circumstances than cis women, and that those circumstances likely give them an advantage in many different sports. What I don’t think follows from that is this advantage being an unfair advantage, especially since every top level athlete has advantages (inherent and otherwise) that have led them to their position.

              As I understand it, “male puberty” does confer some definite athletic advantages, but hormone therapy and other processes undergone by trans women largely mitigate those advantages. What I can’t say (and haven’t seen discussed scientifically or otherwise) is whether or to what degree those advantages remain “unfair” or even significant.

      • smackmyballsoff@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s not that their history makes them less of a woman, just that going through puberty with testosterone leads to advantages that those that went through non-testosterone puberty didn’t have.

        Unfortunately, it’s not as simple as taking testosterone blockers or whatever, they still don’t reverse some of the advantages that going through testosterone puberty provides.

        Someone smarter than me may come along but if not just googling or ducking some knowledge about testosterone puberty will shine some light on why they’ve made this change in the sport…

  • Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    22
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    In theory trans women are superwomen and then in reality they’re weaker and derpier than the top female athletes and all of this is just a scare tactic because these theories havent played out in the real world at all.

    On the sports angle, esports looked like it would finally be the place for me to be a fan because the athletes are relatable to me. But no, they got bought up by the Saudis, so all I get for relatable media is drag queens and furries or whatever.

  • Hegar@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    31
    ·
    10 months ago

    Sport is the most boring show on TV by far, and yet the actors are paid insane amounts. The fandom is the most toxic bullshit out there and the show runners encourage it.

    Cancel sport already, it’s really dumb.

    • tygerprints@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      As one of the characters in (the book) Jurassic Park says, “the two most boring things in the world are sports and fashion.” I couldn’t have said it better myself. But I do have a lot of family members who are athletic, and some have gone as far as olympic competitions. So, I can’t really say they have no valid right to enjoy their sport. And those family members are the most kind and welcoming people, they are absolutely appalled by all this bigoted negativity toward trans athletes, and are smart enough to see if for the fascist malarky it truly is.

  • GreenM@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    22
    ·
    10 months ago

    Just make it third category.

    • female sports won’t get affected
    • fairness will increase
    • fans can watch their own "cup of coffee "
    • possible pretenders will no longer be motivated by easy winning
    • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      10 months ago

      This is just a complete non solution to the problem and effectively just ends up with trans people being banned from sports altogether.

      “Trans” sports teams/leagues (whatever that means) can’t really exist at the amateur local level anywhere but the biggest citiess due to there being not a lot of trans people, and even less trans people who want to play sports.

      The struggle to even get enough trans guys or trans girls to form a team for football or whatever would be a challenge in and of itself, and then this team would pretty much have to fly across the country (or possibly to a different country altogether) to even play a match.

      This is not a reasonable solution for anyone but the people who want to ban trans people from sports.

      The second issue is that this is just fear mongering and not an actual issue to be solved but that’s being argued all over this thread already.

          • GreenM@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            10 months ago

            It’s preferable, as that’s what constructive productive discussion is about as opposite to just negating and pointing out all is wrong all the time while never accepting any ideas.

            • interceder270@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              10 months ago

              It can be very constructive to point out why something is a bad idea without having an alternative in mind.

              Doing something just to do something is how a lot of mistakes and accidents happen.

              all the time while never accepting any ideas.

              That hyperbole. What about good ideas?

              • GreenM@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                I disagree because it doesn’t lead anywhere , thus it doesn’t consruct anything.

                • interceder270@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  It can stop you from making things worse, but I’m tired of arguing this with you.

                  Believe what you want.

        • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          10 months ago

          Trans people should be allowed in the sports of their gender provided they’ve been on HRT consistently for some time

          The length can be argued but 2-3 years seem to be enough.

          • GreenM@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            However those sport associations claim they had researches done and conclusions were that it is not fair due to difference in physical abilities and it brings health risk for female athletes.

          • Pasta4u@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            10 months ago

            2-3 years doesn’t change lung size or bone density. There is a lot of stuff that doesn’t change once it’s developed.

            Just make a separate league

      • セリャスト@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        It’s already the case, most sports allow for women to play in men’s leagues… But they don’t. And trans women would suffer the same way cis women would in men dominated categories (or would they? Depends on the sport I guess, nobody would complain about trans women in F1 Academy I bet)

      • GreenM@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        women as females or identifier ? Open is males + trans females + trans males ?

        • pHr34kY@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Identity is irrelevant. The separation exists so that women get fair competition.

          Women as in someone who was born as, and always has been, biologically female.

          Open means everyone, unrestricted.

          • GreenM@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            I see so in other words keep it stricly male and female category and let female to enter male category by choice.
            Then we are where se are with people lobbing for change.

    • interceder270@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      So, do transgender leagues get the same amount of resources as male and female? There’s no way they’re going to bring in as much money as male or even female leagues.

      • GreenM@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Female leaves done bring as much as male leagues either. So male leagues sponsors female leagues. So i guess nope, as male and female leagues do not either.

    • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I think it’s simpler. Have two categories: one for the weaker gender, one that is open for anybody. First category is needed only for sports and hobbies where there are differences between the groups, and the decision whether it matters can be derived statistically. If there’s only one category and a significant majority of the top players are from a single gender group, they need a second category.

      Then again, I’m not sure what this means if we applied this logic to other things. For instance, 73% of NBA players were black, 0.4% asian in 2021, but that doesn’t seem like something that needs fixing.

      • GreenM@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I’m not sure i follow. So you basically suggest to keep male and female categories but rename them? Or do you suggest to devide female category to stronger and weaker ?

        • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Default to one category, separate if statistics show that one gender group is significantly stronger. Some sports have already established that knowledge, so they can have 2 categories as is. Male and female are fine names.

          So status quo more or less, but underlining that gender groups have differences in some things. That seems to be unclear to some people.

          • GreenM@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            10 months ago

            Well that;s how we got male and female categories. But now we got in between who are apparently weaker than males but can often easily top females. Obvious decision would be to go for certain win.
            There are obviously people who misuse it unjustly to get to the top. Where is the line to become weaker? Would you lower rewards for weaker category to motivate folks to move to stronger one, wouldn’t that make females left at the tail all the time ?

            • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              But now we got in between who are apparently weaker than males but can often easily top females.

              They have the burden of proof to irrefutably show that they are on the same level as the women. I don’t know and don’t have to know how they can do that. If they cannot do that, they go to the default category or come up with something else to do with their life.

              • GreenM@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                In priciple i agree but … i can imagine that it’s pretty simple to just give weak performance on the test day then win every competition ever after but just sightly ahead of females.

    • PotatoKat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Studies have shown that after around 2 years of HRT the strength of trans women level out to the average of cis women. The only things that really stay the same are things like bone length /bone density, and it’s not like there are no cis women with dense bones that are tall.

      Edit: taken from another comment of mine:

      found a more recent study that states endurance things like running and swimming level out by around 2 years, with most things level out after about 4 with the exception of upper body strength. Which is still declining in trans women past that point

      https://academic.oup.com/jcem/advance-article/doi/10.1210/clinem/dgad414/7223439

      So the 1 year that is recommended is too soon for trans women athletes to start competing, but for endurance sports like racing and swimming it should be fine by 2 years. Other sports may need more time, but also we shouldn’t be delaying the lives of trans people for so long. We need to find a good middle ground because it’s not like exceptional cis women don’t exist in those same sports.

        • PotatoKat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          That compete in sports? No.

          The vast-vast majority of trans women take HRT and many of the ones that don’t, don’t because of a lack of access.

          • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Makes sense thanks for the explanation. Yea, I figure it’s way less common for a trans woman to not want to go the HRT route if they have the ability to, but I know a few must exist.

            • PotatoKat@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              10 months ago

              They do exist and they are just as valid, but they’re definitely not the ones competing in sports (plus there are already requirements for trans women to be on HRT before competing in women’s leagues)

        • darq@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          Those are not the trans people being spoken about I’m sports discussions though. Pretty much every sport that allows, or has previously allowed, trans people to compete in the division fitting their gender has had regulations around HRT and maintaining target hormone levels for a period of time before being allowed to compete.

        • PotatoKat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Because hrt changes our biological characteristics. I have breasts and a hip curve of a cis woman. The trans man I know is growing hair like a cis man and is getting voice cracks like a pubescent boy.

          We’re much closer to being intersex than our biological sex

          • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            I don’t think all trans women take HRT, though, right? I imagine most trans women normally go that route, but not all. Maybe the rules can be changed to specify that trans women can compete in women’s sports if they have been on an HRT regiment for long enough, or something.

            This makes me wonder, is there anything in place in these sports keeping a cis male from just claiming to be a trans woman to have an unfair advantage? I do hope they find a way to integrate trans women into women’s sports, but I think there is some stuff that needs to be ironed out.

            • PotatoKat@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              There already are requirements for trans women to be taking HRT before competing against women. I believe the current one is 1 year. No cis man would want to take HRT that would cause them to grow boobs so that argument is moot.

              Edit: imo 1 year is too soon. From a study I read 2 should be good for endurance sports, and 3-5 should be good for others. It’s not right to delay the lives of trans people any further then they’re already being delayed and it’s not like exceptional cis women don’t exist

              Plus this all gets solved if we let trans teens transition since these differences happen during puberty

              • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                Thanks for clearing that up. I always wondered about the requirements/qualification for that as I don’t really follow sports too much, myself.

      • Jin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        Sorry if my English is a bit weird. If they have the chromosomes (XY), then yes.

        • wafflez@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          10 months ago

          Being a man is not xy chromosomes. It’s a social construct normally situated around expressing masculinity in general, with no clear foundation. If you’re referring to male/female, this is also a social construct that fails to account for chromosomes outside of the xx/xy chromosome binary.

          Hormones are the biggest genuine factor when it comes to sports and transwomen have generally the same athleticism as ciswomen due to HRT; and vice versa with men.

          • Jin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            No, chromosomes are not a social construct. They are physical structures in cells that carry genetic information and play a fundamental role in biological processes, including determining an individual’s sex. The concept of chromosomes is grounded in biology and genetics, not social constructs.

            You can spin it all you want, but women are getting destroyed in sports by transwomen because they have physique of a man like bone structure and muscle mass.

          • GreenM@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Social construct is the separation of gender from sex. In many languages it doesn’t even make sense because fe/male is used for animals or wo/men for humans while gender and sex are represented by single word.

            • pete_the_cat@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              This whole argument of “gender vs sex” is ridiculous and always has been. Biology is what matters, not what words you use to refer to yourself or others.

                • pete_the_cat@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  I’m definitely not a conservative Republican, far from it. I love how people immediately jump to conclusions on here based on one statement.

                  I don’t give a damn what bathroom you use.

                  IMO this is like arguing whether a tomato is a fruit or a vegetable.

    • interceder270@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Why did my comment get removed?

      Probably a biased mod who gets mad whenever a discussion doesn’t go their way.

      • TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        10 months ago

        Brand new user totally understands how things work here. Alternatively, recently banmed user totally understands why they got banned. BIASED MODS!!!

    • darq@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Simply because there is a huge difference, biologically, between a cisgender man and a transgender women who is on HRT.

      You can argue that there is still residual advantages remaining after transition, that’s fine. But to call them men is both plainly incorrect, and also offensive.

  • ???@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    God I thought it said the international criminal court

  • Thann@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    My fist thought was “why does the International Criminal Court care”

    • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s worth noting that “scientifically a male” is genuinely a more complicated phrase than it might initially seem at first, because trans people generally do more than just socially transition, changing their name and clothes. Sex differences are primarily mediated through sex hormones, and radically changing one’s hormonal profile, as happens with hormone therapies, causes very real biological effects. A trans woman, while being stronger than your average cis woman, will lose a meaningful amount of muscle due to the lack of testosterone (and will also generally develop better cardiovascular health, again due to the lack of testosterone). Depending on the sport and the individuals in question, it’s not unreasonable to suggest that there are cases where some amount of residual muscle doesn’t necessarily confer a particularly large benefit such that a blanket ban is warranted.

      • AnotherAttorney@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Depending on the sport and the individuals in question, it’s not unreasonable to suggest that there are cases where some amount of residual muscle doesn’t necessarily confer a particularly large benefit such that a blanket ban is warranted.

        Agreed. That said, I’ve yet to see a major sport league that bans transgenders in women’s divisions without at least some empirical research existing that demonstrates an unfair advantage.

        • darq@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          10 months ago

          I mean both chess and pool have recently banned transgender women from competition.

          So the push is not purely an evidence-driven one. In fact there is a very loud political faction trying to remove transgender women from all events, from the highest levels all the way down to park fun-runs.

          • tygerprints@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Isn’t that ridiculous, given that women have empirically proven to be better swimmers in most cases that most men. And I’m certain the reason for banning transgender women from chess is because they realize these people are smarter than the average bear. And more likely to outclass their opponents every time. And you know what? They’re right about that.

        • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Can’t pretend I’m particularly familiar with the specifics, but to be clear, I do think it is absolutely possible, and indeed likely, that there are situations where a genuine advantage is present, and I think the line really needs to be drawn by each individual sports body.

          I understand the idealism of wanting there to be no real restrictions, but you need some regulations, if only to prevent the bad-faith asshole who decides to identify as a woman for the day of a competition. As time passes and more studies are done, we’ll be able to draw more evidence-based lines that more accurately balance accessibility and fairness.

          My only real point here is just to say that this phrase “biological/scientific male” is way way messier than a simple binary category like that might suggest. A huge amount of tissues in the body of some level of sex differentiation, and that differentiation also varies a lot based on the stage of development that their exposed to hormones. A trans person isn’t going to change their skeleton with hormones, but there are other things that do meaningfully change to get closer to the other sex. A trans woman’s breasts, for instance, are genuinely just as “biologically female” as any cis woman’s.

  • beetsnuami@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    10 months ago

    Hej, I‘ve seen quite a few comments using weird expressions to refer to trans women here, so to clarify, a trans woman is not:

    • a scientific male (trans women are scientifically women)
    • a biologically born male (Biologically born? Yes. Male? No.)
    • a biological male (as, usually, biological markers such as anatomy, hormone levels, chromosomes and behavior in trans women are ambiguous)

    A trans woman is:

    • a woman (female) who was assigned male at birth
    • often, but not always, a person who has gone through testosterone puberty, but identifies as female

    Just use the words trans woman and cis woman, it‘s concise, correct and respectful. I‘m not saying that there are no differences between trans women and cis women, but simply that trans women are women. If you disagree with that, go watch ContraPoints or PhilosophyTube.

    Consequently, the international cricket council should call it the elite cis women‘s game from now on, that would just be consistent.

    • wheels@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      I am still confused. My understanding was that trans people change their gender. This is something I am able to wrap my head around because gender (man/woman) is a human construct anyway and people should have the freedom to choose where they are on that spectrum.

      But isn’t sex a genetic thing that can’t be changed? If it’s the case that a person can choose whether they are male or female then science is going to need new terminology to replace male/female for XY and XX because the words science used to use have been commandeered to mean something more like gender?

      • beetsnuami@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        In particular when referring to humans, the definition of sex is ambiguous, as is the term “biological male”. And I think this problem is intrinsic: Gender and sex are complicated (with many different markers which may be congruent for many people, but are not for trans and intersex people), and the usefulness of categories depends on context. For example, in a dating context, gender might be a useful category. In a medical context, sex is not a useful category for trans and intersex people: It’s not sufficient information, and sometimes ambiguous.

        I agree that it would be nice to have other words than for XY/XX chromosomes (or small vs large gametes), this would make the language more exact and inclusive. However, I (and others) dislike the term “biological male”, because I think it exists only to create a category that equates cis men with trans women. Even if we agree on defining “biological male” as a person having XY chromosomes, in a sports context this is an unhelpful category because there are large differences between XY cis men and XY trans women. When there is apparently so much concern for fairness and safety, why not ask the big questions: How can we make sports inclusive, safe and fun for everyone (including trans people!), regardless of genetics? Are sex or gender useful categories to separate competition — or are there other, more useful markers? (And maybe even: Are international competitions as we have them now a desirable system?)

    • Gabu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Uh oh, someone is conflating gender and sex again, despite claiming to be a trans ally.

    • smackmyballsoff@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I agree with much of what you said but have to nit-pick a part that I found confusing.

      trans women are women

      And cis women are cis women?

      Comes off as if an afab person, who has always referred to herself as simply “woman” now has to refer to herself as “cis woman” to be exact, whereas trans women have now adopted “woman”

      I’m a guy, and I’d be pretty irritated if people suddenly started insisting that I not refer to myself as “guy” anymore, because trans guys are now “guys” so they get my old title but now I have to specifically state that I’m a “cis guy” everywhere…

      Like why would I have to give up my title? It’s one thing for them to adopt it as well, not like I mind, more the merrier! But why am I having to change my title when I’ve been the same all along?

      It’s like if people began changing cats into dogs, and claiming the name “cat” for the former dogs. Cool, do what you will, but then they tell me that my “cats” aren’t “cats” anymore, they’re cis-cats and I must refer to them as such. Why? They’ve always been cats to everyone? How you gonna tell me that you get the name “cats” but my lifelong “cats” are now something else?

      • bdx2023@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Trans women are women, and cis women are women. Simple. No one is “taking” someone else’s name.

        • smackmyballsoff@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Last comment stated international women’s cricket should be renamed international cis women’s cricket 🤔 because women who experienced testosterone puberty are excluded

          Whereas a group of TW playing football can 100% use “Women’s football league” Even if the league is 100 trans women and cis women are excluded

          That’s all I’m saying, how’s that not taking a title? Not saying this with any malice, hope that’s clear I’ve no dog in this race other than supporting everyone but that’s weird to me

          • bdx2023@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            … But where is that women’s football league that excludes cis women while still calling itself “[just] women’s football”?

            Whereas we already have many women’s leagues in sports that exclude trans women.

            So if it’s actually happening, then sure I’ll agree to calling it “taking a title” and honestly be against it; imo it sets the fight for trans rights back if we use “woman” exclusively for trans women and cis women only ever get called “cis women”. But again, where is that happening? Who is calling for that?

            I only ever see people claiming that cis women should have exclusive use of the word “women”, not the other way around. Which is just another way of arguing that trans women “aren’t really women”…

  • kttnpunk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    59
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Fuck this. Sports are games, they shouldn’t be taken this seriously. Like, for example, Micheal Phelps has webbed feet and freaky monster lungs but nobody’s banned him from swimming events for that. Every human is different, people need to fucking accept that sports can never be totally fair and realize that’s not what this is about.

    • AnotherAttorney@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      10 months ago

      By this logic, we should all go back to open division sports, which is what historically led to a de facto exclusion of women from all sports because, unsurprisingly, the vast majority of them were unable to be competitive in divisions that had men in them.

        • BillyTheSkidMark@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          While I won’t deny there is a biological difference that impacts performance there’s also a systemic societal difference that doesn’t help.

          In general women are not given the same support, whether from family, schools, coaches, research or funding, to become top athletes.

          It’s certainly much better that it has been in the past now days and it’s getting better, but even just people saying “women aren’t as good as men” is something that sinks into the psyche of women who want to compete.

          It’s akin to men from poorer nations who can’t afford resources, time and training, having a hard time competing against “richer” nations who invest more into it

      • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        10 months ago

        How about adding a third category instead: a free for all category where all genders are welcome to compete and can use as much steroid as they want.

        • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          While I think people should be allowed to do anything they want with their bodies, I understand that sports leagues don’t want the athletes to push boundaries and destroy their bodies with stupid amounts of steroids.

        • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          I’ve always said baseball needs to just say fuck it and let guys go nuts. I want to see someone throw a 108mph fastball that gets clobbered 600ft.

    • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think that gender specific leagues need to go the way of the dodo but while they’re here they’re essentially weight/strength classes and most transwomen are more fairly matched against AMAB men than AFAB women.

      Ideally, we could just realize that having multiple league levels based on body type would be much more equitable.

            • ShaunaTheDead@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              I just want you to know that the study that was posted is trash. Here’s link to a comment on that same study by 3 professors from the same journal https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-023-01928-8

              And here’s a quick TL;DR from the conclusion of the comment on the study is that the original study’s scientific basis is dubious at best, it hasn’t been properly peer reviewed, despite not being properly peer reviewed this article is being shared and used as a basis for shaping policies.

            • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              No worries at all. I know this is a really sensitive subject and it’ll basically require a change in how we view sports leagues and gender to resolve.

          • ShaunaTheDead@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Not only do I think this study is complete non-sense, but 3 other professors at the same journal published their comments and concerns with this study and how it’s being spread around as though it’s fact when in truth, the “science” in it is rubbish.

            Here’s a link to the article in PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37726582/
            PubMed unfortunately doesn’t have a transcript, but you can read the transcript here (or click on the link next to DOI in PubMed that I linked above): https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-023-01928-8

            Here’s TL;DR from the conclusion of the comment on the study is that the original study’s scientific basis is dubious at best, it hasn’t been properly peer reviewed, despite not being properly peer reviewed this article is being shared and used as a basis for shaping policies.

            And besides, even if the original study were true, wouldn’t transgender athletes would be winning at a rate higher than their prevalence in sports? Considering about 1% of people are transgender, they should win 1% of the time, but that doesn’t happen, because any advantage is entirely fictitious.

            And even if there was an advantage, there are lots of people who have a biological advantage. That’s just a part of sports that’s impossible to eliminate because we’re not all robots running on the exact same hardware and software.

            • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              You aren’t factoring in how many people win as a %. Only like .01% of people compete at the top level of sports, if 1% of people are Trans it’s going to take a while to actually hit someone that is both talented enough to be relevant and trans.

      • eupraxia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        It really depends on the sport imo. Trans women may retain some more muscle and some parts of the skeleton are largely unaffected, but muscle elasticity, hip rotation, flexibility, and endurance all end up being more dependent on hormones than birth sex in the long term. How much these things matter varies a lot from sport to sport, and the current system is not sufficient to balance these traits even among people of the same sex. Multiple leagues based on broad body types sounds reasonable, but I have no idea how complicated the rules would have to be to make it completely fair, given we already accept a great deal of unfairness currently.

        • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’d look to wrestling as an example - it manages to have several leagues of weight classes that participate… but yea, it’d be a pretty big change.

      • Lumelore (She/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        As a trans woman who works out but doesn’t really do sports because people make them suck, I have to say that I don’t think that study is correct based of my experiences. Trans women often have lower testosterone than cis women after being on hrt for a while (2 years max typically, but it can be sooner). When I started hrt, literally only about 2 weeks later I noticed massive muscle atrophy and I literally couldn’t even help my father move heavy furniture that I doubt I would have had a problem with before. After that I decided to start lifting and it’s been a few months since then I am still not as strong as I used to be.

        • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          That’s why I think weight/strength classes are the way to go - we arbitrarily divide sports in half by gender and it makes most body types uncompetitive.

    • anlumo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      The problem is that there’s too much money on the line. If certain performance enhancing drugs (like testosterone) are allowed, every athlete will be required to take them if they want to compete at the highest level. Athletes are known to favor short-term gains over long-term health consequences, and they’re pressured by their environment to do so as well.

      • kttnpunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        10 months ago

        Capitalism ruining good things, as always. In the case of trans men on testosterone, though, who cares? I feel like that just levels the playing field for them generally. And as a trans woman? Estrogen has fucked up my body’s ability to build muscle if anything. These arguments all boil down to excuses.

        • anlumo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Even on estrogen, the power level is nowhere near equal to born women. I personally think that the only fair solution is to have separate trans divisions, but there’s the question whether there are enough contenders for that. Even women often have problems, I know a kickboxing slender woman who constantly complains about not being able to find competitors and always having to compete at a severe disadvantage.

          • kttnpunk@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Says who? Why segregate sports in the first place? Why can’t they just exist for the sole purpose of fun? Does it really matter if trans people have a advantage? Are you that afraid of trans people succeeding? Is any of this really enough to justify dehumanizing trans+intersex people and shunting them out of another public space?

      • kttnpunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Oh I’m american I barely know what cricket is tbqh. I just hate how people like me are being discriminated against and excluded from healthy, mainstream pursuits like this especially. Pretty much the holy grail of trans representation because it’s the most dangerous-to-conservative-sensibilities kind of visibility we could have. Like, gods forbid fit trans people do something so normal on TV

      • Deestan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Women should be allowed to compete in women’s leagues. There could be some argument if the sport gave heavy advantage to people who had high testosterone during their teens, but that is not the case in cricket. This shouldn’t be a discussion.

        • Awkward2391@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          Not sure how familiar you are with the sport but the fastest bowled delivery in the men’s game is over 100mph. In the women’s game the fastest is just over 80mph.

          Couple that with the fact that women have slower reaction times (men’s are faster although some may argue the difference is negligible), and men have greater muscle mass (to hit harder and further), the playing field isn’t exactly level.

          • toomanypancakes@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Not sure if you’re familiar with transition as a concept? Because your uncritical comparing men to women without even considering that transition might have an effect implies you aren’t.

            • Narrrz@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              indeed, I think even the top transfem olympian did not rate compared to the top ‘natural’ (I use that word only to distinguish, not to disparage) women.

          • Deestan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            Cricket isn’t on that list. What is the relevance? Genetic differences are significant somewhere else?

            And “men who pretend to be women” are not what transgender is about. Saying so is very shitty.

    • PuddingFeeling [she/her]@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Damn straight the reason why people play sports is to have fun.

      It’s makes me sick these commentators are their hiding transphobia in their “competitive arguments”.

      We don’t need to have these invasive requirements to test someone’s hormones just let people play their gender identity. No human deserves to be excluded from having fun when they only got one life.

    • steeznson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I thought I told you to get rid of those sideburns! …“But Mr Burns I don’t think know you what sideburns…”

      I’ve had it with your attitude! You’re outa here!!